MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092203414 · doi:10.1115/1.3185354

Thermodynamic Equilibrium Model and Exergy Analysis of a Biomass Gasifier

2009· article· en· W2092203414 on OpenAlexaff
T. Srinivas, A. V. S. S. K. S. Gupta, Bale V. Reddy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Energy Resources Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWood gas generatorExergyBiomass (ecology)Heat of combustionSyngasCombustionGas compositionWaste managementExergy efficiencyEnvironmental scienceFuel gasIntegrated gasification combined cycleChemistryProcess engineeringThermodynamicsHydrogenCoalEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biomass gasification involves the production of a gaseous fuel by partial oxidation of a solid fuel. Clean synthesis (syn) gas, produced from partial combustion of biomass, can be burnt in a gas turbine combustion chamber to run a biomass based combined cycle power plant. A thermochemical model has been developed to predict the gas composition and performance of a biomass gasifier based on thermodynamic equilibrium concept for different biomass materials. A simplified numerical method is applied to solve the thermochemical equilibrium reactions. The system consists of a pressurized circulating fluidized bed to produce the syn gas from the biomass. The effect of the relative air fuel ratio (RAFR), steam fuel ratio (SFR), and gasifier pressure has been examined on the gas composition, gasifier temperature, lower heating value of syn gas, and exergy efficiency of biomass gasifier to obtain a high yield from the biomass. It has been found that at lower values of RAFR and SFR, the heating value of the syn gas and the exergy efficiency of gasifier is high.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations109
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Energy Resources TechnologySame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207